Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 19th Mar 2009 06:44 UTC, submitted by Moulinneuf
Thread beginning with comment 353844
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Sad to say - escalation
by jabbotts on Thu 19th Mar 2009 13:08
in reply to "RE[2]: Sad to say"
I hear that osX isn't too hard against privileged escalation. Anyone know if "unapproved" applications will still run simply by changing the identifier text file within the program's directories? (seen as a single object when only viewed through Finder)
It'll be interesting to see the details of the exploits used if/when they become available.




Member since:
2006-01-24
In order to remotely attack a machine you need a way to deploy that attack. These days most operating systems (even windows) have realized that keeping alot of default ports open (listening) is stupid. So the best way to deploy your attack is pretty much through the web.
However some things bother me with this, they claim that they can take full control of the machine through the webbrowser, how exactly can they do that if the browser is running in userland under an account with user privileges? The way I see it they can only utilize the power given to the account which the browser is running under unless they also have some OS privilege-elevation exploit aswell?
Or are all these browsers being run under administrator privileges (which is pretty stupid)?